2003 Mazda 6 vs. 1968 Volvo 145

To start off, 2003 Mazda 6 is newer by 35 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1968 Volvo 145. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1968 Volvo 145 would be higher. At 1,986 cc (4 cylinders), 1968 Volvo 145 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Mazda 6 (104 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 23 more horse power than 1968 Volvo 145. (81 HP @ 4700 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2003 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 1968 Volvo 145. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Mazda 6 weights approximately 35 kg more than 1968 Volvo 145. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 1968 Volvo 145 is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1968 Volvo 145. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Mazda 6, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2003 Mazda 6 (240 Nm) has 83 more torque (in Nm) than 1968 Volvo 145. (157 Nm). This means 2003 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1968 Volvo 145.

Compare all specifications: